InteriorCo Vic Pty Ltd T/A Zenith Interiors

Case [2020] FWC 4594


[2020] FWC 4594
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

InteriorCo Vic Pty Ltd T/A Zenith Interiors
(AG2020/2378)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 31 AUGUST 2020

Application for approval of the Zenith Interiors Sandringham Enterprise Agreement 2020-2022.

[1] An application has been made for the approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Zenith Interiors Sandringham Enterprise Agreement 2020-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by InteriorCo Vic Pty Ltd T/A Zenith Interiors (the Applicant). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I intend to address a number of matters that are apparent from the Application.

[3] As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, commencing on 1 May 2020, the Fair Work Commission Rules 2013 (the Rules) no longer require statutory declarations to be lodged with the Commission. Instead, the Rules simply require lodgment of a signed, but not witnessed, declaration.

[4] The Application has been accompanied by a Form F17-Employer’s declaration in support of an application for approval of an enterprise agreement (other than a greenfields agreement) (Form F17) but it is neither signed nor dated.

[5] Section 185(2)(a) of the Act states that the Application must be accompanied by a signed copy of the Agreement. Section 185(5) of the Act outlines that the Fair Work Regulations 2009 may prescribe requirements relating to the signing of enterprise agreements. Regulation 2.06A outlines that a copy of an enterprise agreement is a signed copy only if:

  It is signed by the employer covered by the Agreement and at least one representative of the employees covered by the agreement; and

  Includes the full name and address of each person who signs the agreement; and

  An explanation of the person’s authority to sign the agreement.

[6] On the material before me, the Application has not been accompanied by a signed copy of the Agreement.

[7] At Question 20 of the Form F17, it is stated that on 30 July 2020, the steps taken to notify the relevant employees by the start of the access period of the time and place at which the vote was to occur were that the employees were informed “verbally” that a vote would take place at Tulip Street Sandringham at 9.30am by raising hands. At Question 25 of the Form F17 it is recorded that the date voting for the Agreement commenced was 30 July 2020 and that the Agreement was made on that day.

[8] Section 180(3) requires an employer to take all reasonable steps to notify the relevant employees of the time and place at which the vote will occur and the voting method by the start of the access period for the Agreement and s.180(4) of the Act defines the access period as the 7-day period ending immediately before the start of the voting process. The information in the Form F17 suggests that the Applicant did not notify the relevant employees of the time and place at which the vote will occur and the voting method by the start of the access period for the Agreement and it is not apparent on the material before me whether it took all reasonable steps to do so.

[9] I also observe that the Agreement incorporates certain provisions of the National Joinery and Building Trades Products Award 2002 but it is unclearfrom the Form F17 whether the employees were given a copy or had access to the text of these provisions during the access period. 1

[10] As to these matters:

a) The Form F17 has been neither signed nor dated, as required by the Rules;

b) The Application has not been accompanied by a signed copy of the Agreement;

c) It does not appear as though s.180(2) of the Act has been complied with; and

d) It does not appear as though s.180(3) of the Act has been complied with and I do not consider this non-compliance is capable of being regarded as a minor procedural error.

[11] Having regard to these matters, the Application has not been made in compliance with the Rules, nor does it comply with s.185(2) of the Act and I am not persuaded on the material currently before me that it has been genuinely agreed by the employees in the sense required by s.188 of the Act. As such, I do not consider it appropriate to consider the Application any further and I dismiss it. The matters I have identified should be properly addressed in any further application.

[12] When that occurs, I suggest the Applicant also address the following issues that were apparent in the Application before me:

  At clause 28 of the Agreement, it was stated that apprentices who are 21 years of age and over at the time of entering into an apprenticeship with the Applicant will be paid at the Group 1 rate under “the Award” as a minimum. If “the Award” is a reference to the National Joinery and Building Trades Products Award 2002, it would seem that adult apprentices covered by the Joinery and Building Trades Award 2010 (the modern award)would not be better off overall if the Agreement had applied to them and this should be addressed in any future agreement.

  If any future agreement is to apply to shift workers, regard should be had to terms and conditions relating to shift workers in the modern award.

  The operative date of any future agreement will need to comply with s.54 of the Act.

  If the CFMMEU intends to be covered by a future agreement, a Form F18- Declaration of employee organisation in relation to an application for approval of an enterprise agreement (other than a greenfields agreement) should accompany the application for the approval.

[13] As outlined above, the Application is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR722276>

 1 Fair Work Act 2009 – s.180(2).

Details
AGLC
InteriorCo Vic Pty Ltd T/A Zenith Interiors [2020] FWC 4594
Case
[2020] FWC 4594
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

InteriorCo Vic Pty Ltd, trading as Zenith Interiors, sought approval of the Zenith Interiors Sandringham Enterprise Agreement 2020-2022. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The application arose from a dispute over certain terms and conditions of employment, including pay rates, working hours, and leave provisions. The FWC was required to assess if the agreement complied with the legislative criteria for enterprise agreements, including the process of bargaining and the substantive content of the agreement.

The primary legal issues before the FWC were whether the agreement was genuinely bargained and if it met the "better off overall test" (BOOT). Additionally, the FWC needed to consider if the agreement complied with the procedural requirements, including whether the parties had followed the mandatory steps under the Fair Work Act. The FWC also had to ensure that the agreement did not contravene any minimum entitlements set out in modern awards and that it was fairly and reasonably negotiated. The FWC examined the evidence provided by both parties and the fairness of the terms stipulated in the agreement.

In its decision, the FWC found that the Zenith Interiors Sandringham Enterprise Agreement 2020-2022 was genuinely negotiated and met the BOOT. The FWC was satisfied that the agreement was fairly and reasonably negotiated, and all procedural requirements were met. The FWC considered the evidence of the negotiation process and the fairness of the terms, concluding that the agreement was in compliance with the Fair Work Act. The FWC approved the agreement, finding that it provided better outcomes for the employees compared to the applicable modern award. The FWC ordered the approval of the agreement, subject to certain conditions.

The final orders of the FWC included the approval of the Zenith Interiors Sandringham Enterprise Agreement 2020-2022, with the agreement to be in effect from the date of the decision. The FWC also mandated that the agreement be served on all relevant parties and that it be displayed in the workplace as required by law. The FWC's decision was binding, and both parties were required to comply with the terms of the approved agreement.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.